저자: 미상 · 외국인
요약 보기
OpenAI 및 AI 스타트업 버블 주장. Thinking Machines Lab의 Tinker 리뷰가 내부 직원·대학원생 리뷰로 의심되고, Humans(시드 4.8억달러, 기업가치 45억달러)도 과열 사례로 지목. Zoff 해임 논란 후 재고용, OpenAI 광고 도입·GPT Go 출시는 자금 압박 신호로 해석. OpenAI 2025년 손실 약 90억~120억달러 추정, 2026년 기준 연간 손실 수백억 달러 규모 추정. 구글은 분기 순이익 340억달러로 대비. 전반적으로 AI 버블과 Enron식 회계 리스크 경고.
다듬은 글
And it probably is a bubble. You'll see correction. You'll also see consolidation. Is it hype? Of course. How else are you going to get people to write $500 billion of checks? AI is your savior almost. Wow, folks. There is either substantial fraud going on here or this is the biggest bubble that we have ever seen in the history of mankind.
And no, I'm not talking about the fraud in Minnesota. We're talking about artificial intelligence. So, while one is government waste, another is the future of our entire global economy. But let's not get too hyperbolic here. Let's understand why I'm making this video. We're going to not only talk about the disaster that's going on at OpenAI.
But to understand how ridiculously ludicrous some of this is, we have to start with what I call borderline fraud. And I'm going to use what OpenAI and former OpenAI staff and current OpenAI staff open AAI staff are pulling off. You'll see. And it's all thanks to this expose by the Wall Street Journal on the former chief technology officer of OpenAI, Meera Veratti.
She left OpenAI to found this company called the Thinking Machines Lab as CEO. She ended up leaving with a co-founder named Barrett Zoff along with some other OpenAI talent including this individual called John Schulman. He is very important here because he was the co-founder of OpenAI and now he's a chief scientist over at Thinking Machines Lab.
And now you might think that Thinking Machines Lab must have a really good product because they've got all of these really big names. They've got Myra, Zoff, Schulman. They all left OpenAI to go to Thinking Machines. Must be a really good company. Probably has some really good reviews that they can pitch.
I mean, after all, they're raising money like crazy. They were founded just 11 months ago. So, imagine this. You created a company 11 months ago and as your company is founded, you get a $2 billion seed round at a valuation of $10 billion. In other words, this Silicon Valley firm that is pretty popular in Silicon Valley known as Andre Horowitz decides, "Hey, OpenAI co-founder and a bunch of OpenAI folks and CTO, they can't do anything wrong.
They're going to have a great product. Let's just yolo a round that we're going to lead and throw $2 billion at them and I'm sure they'll be fine." Now, following that, they ended up raising money at a $12 billion valuation. And now they're trying to raise money at a valuation as high as $50 billion as they're starting their next fundraising target.
And so this makes you wonder, geez, these people have got to have a massively good product. And after all, this is a company that, well, it came from OpenAI. It's got to be good, right? So, what is thinking machines and what does this have to do with the broad open AAI effect? Well, if you jump over to thinking machines, you could see that they have this program or API called Tinker.
And this product is really what they call a fine-tuning as a service product. So, in other words, it lets you fine-tune algorithms for AI research. And this is why a lot of institutions or I should say some institutions, not necessarily a lot of people at them are utilizing this product. Obviously, it's unclear whether or not they generate any revenues, but there's something pretty sus going on here because when you scroll down on what Tinker is, you're going to find something very interesting.
You're going to find these quotes right here, and they look really official. I mean, hey, if I was an investor and Andre and Horowitz is like, "Hey, we're leading around in thinking machines. Want to invest a million bucks in this company so that way they could take their fee and sell to the greater fool?" Be like, I'd look at his website and BE LIKE, "OH, WOW.
BERKELEY, PRINCETON, STANFORD, Redwood Research. Hey, I got into UC Berkeley." Me. Anyway, like this is really cool. This must be good. So then what I did is I looked up these individual names right here. Tyler, Ziron, Yong, Chi, Eric, and Jason. And I found some what I would call suspicious um profiles.
Let's go through of them. Tyler Griggs is just a PhD student at Berkeley. So this is not Berkeley University telling you that the product is fantastic. It's a random PhD student who's probably looking for a job leaving a review for Tinker. Then I've got this guy, Zeron Yang. This guy literally calls himself a firstyear PhD student at Princeton.
So, you're a firstear PhD student and because you're a student at Princeton, you're going to leave a review for this now 12 to50 billion, 11month-old startup. Okay. What about Yong Lynn? Oh, well, that person actually works at thinking machines. You can't make this up. If you actually look at those names closely one more time, I want you to see that Yong Lynn, one of those Princeton folks right here, leaving a review of the product, literally works at the very company that they're leaving a review for.
In my opinion, that is borderline fraudulent. Then if you keep clicking, you find she at least now we got an associate professor. And if I look at Jason, I got a post doctor researcher. So I got a handful of people here, but firstear student, somebody working at Thinking Machines. They looks like their review helped him get a job, huh?
Leave a good Yelp review. We'll get you a job at our $50 billion startup. It's definitely not a money grab. We do good research here. Must be a valuable product. And what happens? People invest in this crap because it's Andre and Horwitzbacked. You know, the Silicon Valley snobs that anything they touch turns to gold because they don't actually have to do fundamental research.
They just sell it to somebody else for more money because by the time it IPOs, Andrees was probably at the very start of the line and they've probably already sold their shares many times over to everybody down the line and they don't really care. It's really a greater fool theory and it really sets up for the problem of where we're going with this because it doesn't end here.
This is just the beginning. Remember the co-founder Barrett Zoff that genius investor that investor or that genius you know co-founder that investor said you know what they got Z they got Myra they got or Mera whatever you want to say uh and they you know they got all these people from open we'll pay $2 billion in cash at a12 billion valuation for them well Zof apparently got into such arguments with the leadership at well thinking machines that Meera had to fire his butt after disagreements about the direction of the company.
You can see it here. By the time of their meeting, Zof, another co-founder, and a third employee had been unhappy with the direction of the company for months. In fact, at one point there in the story, Zof is discussed as basically having take had had to have taken time off because he got sick and the holidays came around.
So, he just wasn't in the office much because, you know, it's hard to have $2 billion for 30 people in a bank account and actually have to show up for work to actually change anything. You know, it's hard to do that. But, I guess they ended up having disagreements about the direction of the company.
And then, of course, Zof decided, you know what, I'm out of here. So, Zof's story is that he quit. Miratt's story is that he was fired. But less than an hour after he was quote unquote fired, Open AAI hired Zoff Mets and Shun Holtz back at the company. So the people that are part of this borderline fraud, again, I'm calling it a borderline fraud.
It's my opinion because they're literally using their own employees to leave reviews of their product, which seems like a scam to me, right? My opinion. Don't sue me, bro. Wait, wait. But they can't get it up. Oh no, the lawsuits. Sorry folks. This ship is leaking before it even set sail. And now that leaking ship is literally just sending their people back to Open AI, which is also a leaking ship.
But don't worry, we got to get to that level of retardation by first covering the next level of retardation that is part of the what I'm going to call the quote greater fool Olympics. Yes, Thinking Machines Labs, which raises $400 million per person with an 11month-old company, which is insane, is now trying to get bested by a company called Humans and a 3month-old company with no revenue and as far as I'm aware, no product, $4.5 billion valuation, and they just raised $480 million.
dollars. Now, what the hell is humans and which also has some folks from, you guessed it, Open AI. All right, humans and folks, I don't get it. You can't make this stuff up. All right, you ready for this? Mind you, this is at a 4.48 billion valuation, $4.5 billion company. What do we have? No one changes the world alone.
AI models rapidly learning are rapidly are rapidly learning to reason better, code faster, and take actions in the world with increasing autonomy. But for humans, progress happens when we understand one another, build trust, make connections, and work together. That is where we believe the next chapter of AI should begin.
What? People just spent half a billion dollars investing on a company that is worried about quote making connections. Today we introduce humans and a human ccentric frontier AI lab. Huh? This requires rethinking everything about how we train models at scale and how people interact with AI. This needs innovations in long horizon and multi-agent reinforcement learning at humans and we tightly integrate science and product development to drive this new paradigm.
You know what we need to to to read this? We need some music. We are builders and researchers who have shaped modern AI. people who have built and scaled seminal working, reasoning, behavioral training, agency, and alignment. Our founding team has led major efforts. Oh my gosh. So, the pitch is a standard for how AI supports human connection and a $4.5 billion valuation for a threemonth-old startup.
Why do I bring this up? Because frankly, I think this is like a top signal. I mean, I'm I'm not calling the top of the market here. I'm just saying this is the retardation that's happening in our markets. And this is the stuff that textbooks are written on. This is the money that is plowing into AI startups, not at real valuations.
As far as I'm aware, this isn't a real product. These are makebelieve fantasies because people have a name in Silicon Valley. They throw it at Andre and Horowitz. They put their stamp on it and then they sell it to some greater fool who's like co-founder OF OPEN AI. OH, innovation sounds good. This is insane.
We'll be reading about this in textbooks after the crash. This is a giant money grab. No wonder the people don't show up for work. It's ridiculous. And honestly, I think it's it's offensive. And then we're going to talk about OpenAI, which is his own problem. But I actually think it's offensive to people who work hard every single day to improve whatever you're working at, your product, your company or whatever.
And you know what? Look, maybe I'm just a little salty, okay? I have not taken a single dollar of VC money for my AI startup because it started as a real estate company. You know, we're like $160 million company. You know, we've raised like whatever 607 $80 million somewhere in that range. you got $66 million of free and clear real estate, probably more than that at this point.
Uh, and like 22 million, 23 million bucks in the bank, and we have no bank debt. And the point for us is we're actually developing real estate AI where we're solving real problems for people. We don't have this crazy $550 billion valuation or whatever, and we actually have a real product. So, yeah, like maybe I'm a little salty.
It's okay. We did just extend the fund raise to February 6th. It's because I'm investing a million dollars into it because I personally look at it and say I'd rather throw an extra million dollars into that than have any exposure to scam altman. It's not a solicitation for you. I'm just putting my bias out there.
Okay. Now, let's understand what's going on with OpenAI. Specifically, what's going on with good old Sam Alman? Because Sam Alman previously told us that using advertisements would be a last resort for the company and that last resort apparently has now turned into we're going to do ads. Yeah. So after we got the activation of Code Red where Sam Olman internally issued the Code Red memo telling employees to drop everything and focus on beating Gemini because they're eating their lunch.
They're taking substantial market share from Chat GPT, especially since major clients like Salesforce started pivoting. Now, the company's like, "Yeah, you know what? Even though back then we said that ads would be a last resort, we're going to do ads." They also just introduced GPT Go at $8 per month, uh, which is kind of a way of suggesting that their $20 per month product just wasn't gaining any traction.
So now they're trying to create a discounted tier at, you know, basically 40% of that prior cost just to try to convert some users to paying customers because let's face it, they have a really big problem. When you consider the fact that 95% according to the information, 95% of the users of GPT do not pay a dime for the product.
I mean, leave a comment below if you use GPT but you don't pay you've never paid a dime to Sam Alman. Let me know. I think this is very interesting because to me it shows that generic ch chatbot advice that will likely be commoditized. You know, Siri uh via uh Apple is now expected to finally, it only took like 3 years, integrate the chatbot features fully into Siri so it's functional by the end of this year.
Who knows? They're always late on their product, but I suspect when they when they do, you know, GPT might have even bigger problems than just Gemini. It'll actually be integrated into a voice assistant. Imagine when Amazon actually includes it into the TVs so that when you say the A word, I don't want to activate it right now.
I probably already activated some of your things, you know, you don't need to open up these apps anymore. Now, there's a rumor that OpenAI is so desperate for money that not only are they flip-flopping on ads, not only are they discounting their service because they can't sell anything for what's going to be a commoditized product.
That's really how, and I'm not saying this as a pitch. I'm just saying that as a differentiation, as a differentiation, this is how I think the real estate AI we're building is unique because nobody's doing it. It relies on somebody with real estate knowledge actually being able to train the artificial intelligence to show how much of a net worth boost you could get from buying a certain property versus another.
Right? Like this is a tool that could actually make people, you know, 50 to1 to $200,000 of net worth. That's why we think our app is valuable. We're not just looking up recipes or definitions like a chatbot. Anyway, not to bag on that. That's useful, too. But it's interesting because now they're testing ads.
They're doing a cheaper plan. They're giving free access to people who've previously paid just to try to get them to come back. Now, there's a rumor that OpenAI plans to take a cut of customer AI aided discoveries. Now, that's really interesting because basically what they're saying is, "Hey, uh, you know, if our chatbot helps you come up with a product idea or whatever, we want a slice of the money that you make from that." In my opinion, this reeks desperation.
This is kind of like when you had the CFO of OpenAI raise that little red balloon and kind of suggest that the government should backs stop AI spending at GPT and guarantee the debt that they take on so that they could keep taking on more debt because AGI is coming. Artificial general intelligence is around the corner.
Mind you, even Jensen at Nvidia does not think that artificial general intelligence is around the corner. He thinks that artificial intelligence growth will be much more gradual. I've got a full breakdown on Jensen's Joe Rogan podcast coming in which he mentions that. Stay tuned for that. Subscribe to the channel if you want to see that.
But, and that's taking me a while. It's like a three-hour one, right? I mean, I'm not going to be three hours long, but his podcast was really long. Point is, we're not close to AGI. That's just the sales pitch that's being used to try to get more money for OpenAI because they're really on a fundraising treadmill.
I mean, that's why Kenny G is like, they have to sell hype because if they don't sell hype, how are they going to raise money for their product? They're not. They're going to run out of money and then they'll be screwed. Sam Alman is probably one of the greatest salespeople we've ever seen. First of all, it's worth knowing that they raised $40 billion in a single fund raise.
When they raised that, they beat Saudi Araco going public for how much money they raised. This is massive. They are really good at fundraising, so you have to give them credit for that. SpaceX might actually beat that. In total, they've raised about $60 billion since 2022. Now, they're trying to raise another $50 billion from the Saudis.
They've kind of run their tap at Microsoft than Amazon, though Amazon rumoredly just invested another $10 billion into them. So, they're running their tap everywhere. And now they're going to the Middle East to get money. HSBC estimates that they're going to be cash flow negative until at least 2030.
And they're going to need another $27 billion between now and then just to make it there and stay solvent. Again, part of that reason is because they spend way too much money on free users. So, they have to be fundraisers and they have to be a hype mill. But the problem is it's probably not very sustainable.
And it makes sense why Elon Musk says OpenAI will bankrupt Microsoft. Now, I find that unlikely. Obviously, Microsoft does have a 27.5% stake in OpenAI. And Nadella's responded to this saying that even if OpenAI was worth zero dollars, Microsoft would still benefit from the co-pilot integration they have, which is now non-exclusive.
Non-exclusive because again, OpenAI needs more money, Microsoft couldn't feed the the kitty or, you know, basically the burn rate, so to speak. Uh, and so Microsoft is like, fine, go find some other partners to go make money with. Look at 2026 solveny expectations. revenue maybe 20 bill compute cost probably around 12 bill 5 bill on people Stargate $4 billion now you've got a net deficit if you minus this out of about17 billion especially once you add in other pro uh you know uh projected sort of burn this is a problem this company blows money it lasts as long as the fund fundraising stays stable and that's why you're seeing CDS's which are credit default swaps start spiking at companies like Oracle.
I'll show those uh in just a moment but I want you to understand just graphically the magnitude of some of this pain of the burn rate. So here's just another graphic we have spending 22 billion that was 2025 raising third or revenue of 13 billion so 9 billion in losses. Now, that might actually be wrong.
And I'm going to show you why it's wrong because of leaked financials at Microsoft. But first, it's worth noting that for every dollar they earn, they spend about a buck69, they're projected to spend upwards of $40 billion per year in in losses, frankly, by 2028. But Microsoft recently released some disclosures that says these people are so incompetent at actually running a profitable business that it's actually likely based on Microsoft's data that they might be losing as much as 48 billion per year already.
Why is that? Well, it's because based on Microsoft's quarter3 financial data, Microsoft took a $12 billion or or basically Microsoft took a loss based on the stake that Microsoft has in OpenAI. People divided this into each other and they figured out that OpenAI probably lost about 12 billion dollars in a single quarter in the third quarter of 2025.
Which actually means OpenAI's losses weren't $9 billion on a, you know, for 2025. They might actually be running a loss of closer to $50 billion per year. Now, the reason I put Google over here is just for comparison sake. Google doesn't have to get you to actually sign up for their software because a I don't think they have knucklehead engineers that have to borderline provide fraud on their website suggesting that oh our own employees reviewing the business.
I think that's wrong. I have no proof that they're actually fraud. I just think it's really sus. Right. I'm providing exactly why I think everything in terms of my opinion is my opinion. But I will tell you, Google in the last quarter, they did $34 billion in net profit. Bottom line, folks, bottom line profit in the quarter.
If you annualize Google's last quarter, Google generated a uh if you annualize it out, Google generates $136 billion of profit. Open AAI is expected to lose $50 billion in a year. That's a massive difference. Google, Meta, Microsoft, these businesses have sustainable businesses that actually print money.
OpenAI doesn't have that. And it's no surprise that the people that leave OpenAI to go create other businesses resort to shady practices because they're probably used to shady practices at OpenAI. I really hate to say it, but it makes me really skeptical because OpenAI is also the same company. We know this through the whole circle jerk.
OpenAI is the same company that says they're going to invest $1.4 trillion dollars. Stargate and this that or whatever. And everybody should invest in OpenAI. And as a result of those commitments, Nvidia gives higher forecasts, AMD gives higher forecasts, and the entire supply chain gives higher forecasts.
What happens if OpenAI can't raise money anymore? That's actually, in my opinion, exactly why Elon Musk just got bankers on board to finance the Space X IPO IPO near peak. That could help you raise money so you could plow it into Gro so you could sell some of your own shares. That's my opinion. But we do know that Elon Musk did just get bankers on board.
Needs the money to keep funding Grock. And Grock's market share, I mean, I hate to say it, but it's nowhere close to what we're seeing at some of these these other businesses. First of all, if you look at this particular chart right here, you can see Grock doesn't even make uh uh the list over here.
I've got Anthropic, OpenAI, Google, Meta, Coher, Mistrol, Quen, and Deepseek. And then, of course, they have they have other up at the top. This is for LLM API usage. So, worth noting this has to do with API usage, not regular usage. Regular usage, Grock does show up, but it's worth remembering that Gemini is really starting to eat their lunch.
Well, not Grock's lunch, but specifically uh Open AI's. And if you compare OpenAI to Gemini, specifically those two, you can actually see on this chart right here, that Gemini h had over here exposure to the market of probably around 8%. Uh that then grew to about 12% and now is probably worth about 25% of the market.
So you could see that big blue section exploding and where they're taking away from is the green chat GPT. You know, Grock, for example, is down here in that that lower allocation bunched in or bundled in with Deepseek and the others. Issue is most people just don't pay. And that's why having that other profitable business is useful.
And so, it makes sense why they have to flip-flop on ads and trying to find money in any which way they can, including taking money from your business ideas. is if you come up with a business idea on Grock, I mean slowly what they're going to do is they're going to risk alienating even more customers from OpenAI.
And that's the problem. If you alienate your customers at OpenAI because they're getting advertised to or you're considering stealing money from them just because they ideated about some business idea on your platform. I think that's basically theft. Well, then people stop using your product. People stop using your product.
then people stop investing in your product. Now, the problem with that is they're still hiding that. And this makes me feel like it's almost, dare I say, Enronish. Only financial institution that can't produce a balance sheet or a cash flow statement. Look at this quote here from the Wall Street Journal.
It says, "The boss of one venture capital firm notes that OpenAI's losses are as big as the deficits of many national governments. This VC laments that in fundraising discussions, you are not even allowed to ask about the amount of cash it's burning. When questioned in a recent podcast, uh Brad Gersonner, one of OpenAI's most loyal investors, asked how the company was going to fund their gargantuan spending commitments.
And Mr. Alman snapped, "If you want to sell your shares, I'll find you a buyer." And so there you have it. a company that doesn't want to talk about how much money they're burning. Instead, they'll make you look dumb suggesting you should sell and you're not even quote allowed to ask about our cash burn at fundraising meetings. This to me screams Enron and we should all be worried. .
Comments 0